Biblical?

[thessalonian]

I think there is a wide disparity between Protestants and Catholics and between Protestants and Protestants for that matter regarding this term. So let’s discuss it.

Some say that Biblical means that it has to be exactly, explicitly in the Bible or they won’t believe it. Yet if this were true then Jesus, who pointed to the three days he was to spend in the grave was violating this definition. For there is nowhere in the Old Testament where it says that he was to spend three days in the earth explicitly. The verse Jesus sites is “just as Jonah spent three days in the belly of the whale, so the son of Man will spend three days in the grave.”

CAtholics of course say that many things are implicit in scripture. I have not found any Catholic doctrine that is not at least implicit in scripture. Further I think much of what the Protestants who require explicitness is really only implicit at best.

Some use 1 Cor 4:6 “do not go beyon what is written” to say that it has to be explicit in scripture. Well, I’ll try not to color the discussion too much on this and let’s just go for it.

 

[jjwilkman]

Huh?

 

[coralewisjr]

Part of the problem is that some Protestants cling to Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone, no Tradition).

Another problem is that Catholics and Protestants fight over meanings of Scripture. For example, when I was on a Protestant forum defending [Catholic] truth with Bible verses, I was often accused of taking Scripture out of context (usually when proving that birth control is wrong). I could see that they did the same without realizing it.

my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne

 

[thessalonian]

jjwilkman:

Huh?

Are you Catholic? Do you never have 1 Cor 4:6 thrown at you because you pray to saints?

 

[slinky1882]

coralewisjr:

Part of the problem is that some Protestants cling to Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone, no Tradition).

Another problem is that Catholics and Protestants fight over meanings of Scripture. For example, when I was on a Protestant forum defending [Catholic] truth with Bible verses, I was often accused of taking Scripture out of context (usually when proving that birth control is wrong). I could see that they did the same without realizing it.

my Mother my Confidence,
Corinne

Corinne,
I have experienced the same thing in real life. Just as I am starting to make sense, I am being told that I need to read the whole section or that I am twisting the context. From that point often, the other in the dialouge will skip to another section. Thanks and God Bless.

 

[jimmy]

thessalonian:

I think there is a wide disparity between Protestants and Catholics and between Protestants and Protestants for that matter regarding this term. So let’s discuss it.

Some say that Biblical means that it has to be exactly, explicitly in the Bible or they won’t believe it. Yet if this were true then Jesus, who pointed to the three days he was to spend in the grave was violating this definition. For there is nowhere in the Old Testament where it says that he was to spend three days in the earth explicitly. The verse Jesus sites is “just as Jonah spent three days in the belly of the whale, so the son of Man will spend three days in the grave.”

CAtholics of course say that many things are implicit in scripture. I have not found any Catholic doctrine that is not at least implicit in scripture. Further I think much of what the Protestants who require explicitness is really only implicit at best.

Some use 1 Cor 4:6 “do not go beyon what is written” to say that it has to be explicit in scripture. Well, I’ll try not to color the discussion too much on this and let’s just go for it.

Matthew refers to an oral tradition in chapter 2 of his gospel where Christ rides into Nazareth on the donkey. Matthew ways, “so what was said would be fulfilled.” Jude refers to a couple of non canonical books in his epistle.